According to One News tonight, Bush and Blair have agreed that the UN will play "a vital role" in postwar Iraq. What "vital role" will that be? Paying for it, perhaps? Or did they just leave out the words "but subserviant" in order to get something they could both agree to?
Excuse my cynicism, but this is hard to square with what numerous American officials have been saying all week (the latest being a statement by John Negroponte that "people shouldn't be surprised if the coalition is going to take the lead in Iraq, given the fact that it's the coalition that has basically sacrificed its blood and treasure to achieve the outcome that now seems to be inevitable.") I know Blair is interested in bringing the UN on board, and will be pressing hard for it as a quid pro quo for his staunch support of Bush. But it's clear that Bush doesn't do quid pro quo, even for lapdogs as subserviant as Blair.
Basically, I'll believe it when I see it.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Due to abuse and trolling, comments have been disabled. If you don't like this decision, you can start your own blog here
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.